A judge may decide to publish a statement after passing sentence on an offender in cases where there is particular public interest; where a case has legal significance; or where providing the reasons for the decision might assist public understanding.
Please note that statements may include graphic details of offences when it is necessary to fully explain the reasons behind a sentencing decision.
Follow us if you wish to receive alerts as soon as statements are published.
Once charges are spent, any statement in relation to them is removed and cannot be provided or acknowledged. Statements published before the launch of the website may be available on request. Please email email@example.com.
The independence of the judiciary is essential to safeguard people’s rights under law - enabling judges to make decisions impartially based solely on evidence and law, without interference or influence from the government or politicians.
When deciding a sentence, a judge must deal with the offence that the offender has been convicted of, taking into account the unique circumstances of each particular case. The judge will carefully consider the facts that are presented to the Court by both the prosecution and by the defence.
For more information about how judges decide sentences; what sentences are available; and matters such as temporary release, see the independent Scottish Sentencing Council website.
Read more about victims of crime and sentencing.
HMA v Kieran Maule, Dylan Patrick and Aaron Henderson
Apr 25, 2023
In sentencing, Lord Arthurson said:
“Kieran Alan George Maule, Dylan Patrick and Aaron Henderson, you each stand before the Court this morning convicted of the crime of assault to severe injury, permanent disfigurement, permanent impairment and danger to the of life and attempted murder of a 53 year old man at Hunter Square, Edinburgh during the afternoon of 20 October 2020, you Mr Patrick after trial by verdict of a jury on 23 March 2023, and you Mr Maule and Mr Henderson by way of your own pleas of guilty at a preliminary hearing on 28 June 2022. In addition you Mr Patrick were convicted of a separate charge of the assault to injury of another complainer.
As a group of three you, as a pack, as Crown counsel put matters to the jury, spontaneously engaged in a concerted and murderous attack upon your victim, pushing him on the body, repeatedly punching and kicking him on the head and body causing him to fall to the ground, and whilst he was on the ground you repeatedly kicked him on the head and body and repeatedly stamped on his head and body, rendering him unconscious.
The three of you then left the scene together, strolling up the High Street and paying no heed to the scene of physical carnage left behind by you in Hunter Square.
An ambulance attended. A paramedic found your victim to be totally unconscious. His breathing required to be supported by a bag valve mask. He was conveyed to Edinburgh Royal Infirmary under fast escort as a matter of urgency. He was medically assessed on admission to be at stage 3, the very lowest level, of the Glasgow Coma Scale. He required to be intubated, ventilated and placed in an induced coma. Without this intervention to maintain his respiratory function, he would have died. He had sustained a significant brain injury, namely multifocal intraparenchymal haemorrhages involving the right thalmus and left thalmus. He had additionally sustained fractures to the left orbital ridge and zygomatic arch. He remained in intensive care and high dependency until 10 November 2020. He was transferred to Astley Ainslie Hospital in January 2021 for rehabilitation. At the time of transfer he had cognitive impairment, left spastic paralysis of his left upper and lower limbs causing limitation of movement and pain, impaired swallowing requiring the use of a feeding tube and a urethral catheter and nerve pain requiring high doses of pain medication.
Your victim required rehabilitative care and remained in hospital for three months. His functional abilities remain compromised. He has sustained memory loss. He has weakness to the left upper and lower limbs requiring a crutch for mobility indoors and a self-propelled wheelchair for mobility outdoors. He has sustained cognitive impairment and continues to endure persistent pain and discomfort. There is no prospect of further improvement in his functioning ability.
The medical and indeed social and employment consequences for your victim attributable to your murderous and concerted attack upon him can only be described as life-changing and of the utmost gravity. He gave evidence in the courtroom from his wheelchair.
You will all accordingly today receive substantial custodial sentences. Different factors apply however in respect of each of you in the sentencing exercise before the Court.
You Mr Maule are now aged 24. You were aged 21 at the time of this offence. You have a very limited record at summary level, with your two prior convictions both resulting in admonitions. You pled guilty at the first preliminary hearing in this case. You gave contrite and credible evidence for the Crown in the trial which proceeded against your co‑accused. The background report now available refers to your adverse childhood experiences and vulnerable present mental health. Your counsel has this morning, in mitigation on your behalf, sought to emphasise the following points: your early plea, your age and the application of the relevant sentencing guidelines, your remorseful evidence at trial, your adverse childhood experiences, your reported health issues including complex post-traumatic stress disorder and ADHD and classes already undertaken by you in custody.
You Mr Patrick are now aged 22. You were aged 20 at the time of this offence. You have no record of previous convictions at all. You have a daughter and are currently experiencing poor mental health. You proceeded to trial and were in due course convicted by the jury not just of the principal index offence but also of an additional crime of assault to injury. Your counsel has this morning, in mitigation on your behalf, drawn attention to the following matters: your age and the application of the guidelines, your lack of any prior convictions, your adverse childhood experiences and present suicidal ideation and your committed attachment to your young daughter.
You Mr Henderson are now aged 20. You were aged 18 at the time of this offence. You too pled guilty at the first preliminary hearing and gave contrite and credible evidence for the Crown at your co-accused’s trial. You, however, have a significant record of pre and post index offence criminal offending including convictions on indictment in 2018 and 2022, the latter for assault and robbery, and at summary level for assault to severe injury in 2021. You have in addition been assessed as currently presenting a high risk of reoffending. You have serious mental health issues, including a diagnosis by a forensic psychiatrist of post-traumatic stress disorder. You had at the time of this offence a history of consuming street valium and cocaine on a daily basis. You have two children. Your counsel has this morning, in mitigation on your behalf, referred to a letter of apology to the victim in this case prepared by you. He has additionally emphasised your age, the remorse demonstrated by you including in the giving of evidence at trial, your desire to be a consistent parent and your acknowledgement of the work which requires to be done to address your offending.
In these whole circumstances I propose the following custodial sentences in respect of each of you on this indictment. Mr Maule and Mr Henderson, you are aged 24 and 20 respectively, so there is a material age gap between you, but you Mr Henderson have a far more extensive criminal history, including for crimes of violence. Each of you gave evidence and pled guilty at an early stage.
In these circumstances, you Mr Maule will on charge 2 serve a sentence of imprisonment of 5 years and 6 months, discounted from a period of 7 years and 6 months due to the utility and timing of your plea of guilty, the enhanced discount applied in recognition of the remorse demonstrated by you by way of your Crown evidence at trial.
You Mr Henderson will on charge 2 serve a sentence of detention of 5 years and 6 months, discounted from a period of 7 years and 6 months due to the utility and timing of your plea of guilty, again with an enhanced discount in recognition of your own Crown evidence. These sentences will each be backdated to 28 June 2022, being the date of your respective pleas of guilty and remand into custody.
You Mr Patrick have no previous convictions at all. You are aged 22. You were convicted after trial and so are of course entitled to no discount. You will serve on charge 2 a sentence of 7 years and 6 months imprisonment, which sentence will in your case be backdated to the date of your conviction by the jury and remand into custody by the Court, namely 23 March 2023. You will be admonished on charge 1, having regard to the essentially summary nature of that matter and the sentencing principle of totality.
In respect of each of you I wish to make it very clear that the sentencing objectives applied are those of retribution and rehabilitation and that but for your respective ages and the guidelines on sentencing young offenders which are accordingly engaged in this case, you would all have been subject to adult headline custodial sentences of in the region of 9 to 10 years duration.”
25 April 2023